[Senate Report 109-204]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]



109th Congress                                                   Report
                                 SENATE
 1st Session                                                    109-204
_______________________________________________________________________

                                     

                                                       Calendar No. 321

 
                WARNING, ALERT, AND RESPONSE NETWORK ACT

                               __________

                              R E P O R T

                                 of the

           COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION

                                   on

                                S. 1753



                                     

       DATE deg.December 8, 2005.--Ordered to be printed

 Filed under authority of the order of the Senate of November 18, 2005
       SENATE COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION
                       one hundred ninth congress
                             first session

                     TED STEVENS, Alaska, Chairman
                 DANIEL K. INOUYE, Hawaii, Co-Chairman
JOHN McCAIN, Arizona                 JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER IV, West 
CONRAD BURNS, Montana                    Virginia
TRENT LOTT, Mississippi              JOHN F. KERRY, Massachusetts
KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON, Texas          BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota
OLYMPIA J. SNOWE, Maine              BARBARA BOXER, California
GORDON H. SMITH, Oregon              BILL NELSON, Florida
JOHN ENSIGN, Nevada                  MARIA CANTWELL, Washington
GEORGE ALLEN, Virginia               FRANK LAUTENBERG, New Jersey
JOHN E. SUNUNU, New Hampshire        E. BENJAMIN NELSON, Nebraska
JIM DeMINT, South Carolina           MARK PRYOR, Arkansas
DAVID VITTER, Louisiana
                    Lisa Sutherland, Staff Director
             Christine Drager Kurth, Deputy Staff Director
                      David Russell, Chief Counsel
     Margaret Cummisky, Democratic Staff Director and Chief Counsel
 Samuel Whitehorn, Democratic Deputy Staff Director and General Counsel


                                                       Calendar No. 321
109th Congress                                                   Report
                                 SENATE
 1st Session                                                    109-204

======================================================================




                WARNING, ALERT, AND RESPONSE NETWORK ACT

                                _______
                                

                December 8, 2005.--Ordered to be printed

 Filed under authority of the order of the Senate of November 18, 2005

                                _______
                                

       Mr. Stevens, from the Committee on Commerce, Science, and 
                Transportation, submitted the following

                              R E P O R T

                         [To accompany S. 1753]

    The Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, to 
which was referred the bill (S. 1753) to establish a unified 
national hazard alert system, and for other purposes, having 
considered the same, reports favorably thereon with an 
amendment (in the nature of a substitute) and recommends that 
the bill (as amended) do pass.

                          Purpose of the Bill

  The purpose of S. 1753 is to create a national alert system 
that will build upon current alerting capabilities to provide 
alerts to the public across a variety of media technologies to 
protect public safety. The bill will provide for the 
development and administration of a unified alerting system 
that will allow Federal, State, tribal and local officials to 
provide alerts to their communities across a variety of 
communication technologies. The bill aims to ensure that an 
individual will receive an alert of a pending threat regardless 
of their location or the communication technologies in use.
  Additionally, as amended, the bill authorizes the National 
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) to establish, 
operate, and maintain a dependable national tsunami warning 
system that would provide maximum tsunami detection capability 
for the nation. The system would build on the model established 
in the Pacific, and provide for its repair, expansion and 
modernization by the close of calendar year 2007. The system 
would include four components: an expanded and upgraded 
detection and warning system, a Federal-State tsunami hazard 
mitigation program, a tsunami research program, and a 
modernization and upgrade program. In addition, the bill would 
direct NOAA to provide any necessary technical or other 
assistance to international efforts to establish regional 
systems in other parts of the world, including the Indian 
Ocean. The bill would authorize $35 million for each of fiscal 
years 2006-2012 to carry out these activities.

                          Background and Needs

                       NATIONAL ALERTING PROGRAM

CURRENT ALERTING PROGRAMS

  Currently Federal, State, and local governments use a variety 
of mechanisms to alert the public to threats from natural 
hazards, man-made accidents, and terrorist incidents. Most 
prominent among the alerting mechanisms is the Emergency Alert 
System that utilizes cable and broadcast television and radio 
to rebroadcast alerts to the listening public. Additionally, 
NOAA operates the NOAA All-Hazards Radio program that includes 
over 900 radio transmitters across the United States that 
broadcast alerts to specially configured devices.
  Recently, many municipalities have begun operating their own 
alerting systems. These systems allow citizens to receive 
alerts over cell phones, email, and wireline communications 
from the government on events ranging from school closings to 
terrorist attacks. The wireless industry has also implemented a 
program that allows their customers to receive Amber Alerts as 
text messages over their cell phones.

LIMITATIONS OF EXISTING PROGRAMS

  Current alerting regimes suffer from 2 chief limitations: 
gaps in the penetration of the alerting capability both within 
and among communications technologies and the limited 
capability to target the alerts to a particular geographic 
region.
  The new alerting programs that are being fielded by 
municipalities require citizens to ``opt-in'' to the program. 
Even with the best education efforts, large segments of the 
population are unaware of the system and unable to receive 
alerts. For example in the National Capital region there are 
only approximately 50,000 subscribers to mobile wireless alerts 
in a region of approximately 4 million people, most of whom own 
a wireless device and are very attuned to the threat of natural 
disasters and terrorist incidents. Similarly, although the NOAA 
All-Hazards Radio system broadcasts to over 98 percent of the 
population of the United States, only 17 percent of households 
own a receiver. While there are a number of alerting mechanisms 
available to the public, because of coordination and 
implementation problems, there is not a comprehensive and 
reliable alerting ability for emergency managers.
  Beyond the difficulties associated with low penetration 
within affected populations, problems exist with some alerting 
tools not being able to target their alerts only to the 
population at risk. NOAA All-Hazard Radio, for example, sends 
alerts according to county boundaries. This causes significant 
problems when the county is very large and the threat is 
confined to a small geographic region in the county. It is 
particularly troublesome when the county is densely populated 
and large sections of the unaffected population receive an 
alert. Traditional broadcast media only have the ability to 
provide an alert to all of their customers within their 
broadcast region. In addition, a significant problem develops 
when citizens begin to ignore the alerts because they are 
receiving numerous alerts that do not pertain to them.

TSUNAMI PREPAREDNESS

  Tsunami are a fast-moving series of ocean waves generated by 
rapid, large-scale displacement of the seafloor which raises 
and/or lowers the water column above it. Such displacement is 
usually caused by submarine geologic activity such as 
volcanoes, earthquakes, or landslides. Variables affecting the 
size and power of tsunami include: the size and speed of the 
seafloor displacement, the depth of the water column above the 
displacement, the efficiency of the energy transfer from the 
earth's crust to the water column, and the shape of the 
shoreline and the seafloor along the coast where the waves 
reach land.
  Tsunami can travel across open ocean at great speeds, 
sometimes over 600 miles per hour in very deep water. They can 
be only a few inches high and many miles long. As tsunami enter 
shallow water, their speed decreases and the wave height 
increases. This ``shoaling effect'' creates a larger, 
relatively slower wave that can cause massive damage in coastal 
areas and low-lying inland regions. Tsunami often appear as a 
rapidly moving tide, a series of breaking waves, or a bore wave 
(a step-like wave with a steep breaking front). Tsunami rarely 
cause the high, breaking waves which many people envision 
``tidal waves'' look like. Behind the bore is a fast-moving 
flood that is capable of carrying extremely large and heavy 
pieces of debris. Strong tsunami-induced currents can lead to 
erosion of foundations around coastal structures. Finally, 
tsunami can result in significant loss of life.
  Providing sufficient warning is crucial for minimizing the 
loss of life due to tsunami. NOAA is responsible for 
coordinating tsunami-related activities in the United States 
and works closely with the United States Geological Survey 
(USGS) and the National Science Foundation (NSF) to provide, 
respectively, seismographic information and science and 
research capabilities. NOAA also represents the United States 
as a member of the International Tsunami Warning System in the 
Pacific, the only international tsunami warning system. The 
operational center of the international system is located at 
the National Weather Service offices in Hawaii. The 
international system was established by the Intergovernmental 
Oceanographic Commission (IOC) of the United Nations 
Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) in 
1965. While the system can detect earthquakes through a global 
seismic network, it has tsunami forecasting and warning 
capability only for locations in the Pacific.
  Tsunami preparedness requires systems to address detection 
and warning; research, education and preparedness; hazard 
mitigation; and international participation and cooperation. 
The U.S. tsunami warning program, first established in 1948, is 
run by NOAA through 2 tsunami warning centers, located in 
Hawaii and Alaska, which collate and analyze seismic data from 
the USGS, sea level data from numerous coastal monitoring 
stations, and pressure data from an array of 6 Deep-ocean 
Assessment and Reporting of Tsunami (DART) buoys.
  Approaches and expectations for tsunami warning and 
preparedness differ depending upon whether a tsunami is of a 
local or distant origin. The greatest risk is posed by local 
tsunami, which may give residents only a few minutes to seek 
safety and are more devastating in impact. Tsunami of distant 
origin may give residents more time to evacuate threatened 
coastal areas, but there is greater need for timely and 
accurate assessment of the hazard to avoid costly false alarms. 
The National Tsunami Hazard Mitigation Program (NTHMP) is a 
Federal/State partnership consisting of NOAA, USGS, the Federal 
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), and the States of Alaska, 
California, Hawaii, Oregon, and Washington. This program was 
established through Congressional action following the 1992 
earthquake and tsunami off of California, for which no warning 
was issued because of outdated detection instrumentation and 
technology. The resulting NTHMP consists of 3 program areas: 
(1) warning guidance (relating to the detection system), (2) 
mitigation, and (3) hazard assessment.
  NTHMP's mitigation efforts focus on preparing communities at 
risk before a tsunami strikes to lessen the impact. This 
includes educating the community, local businesses, planners, 
emergency managers and government officials on the risk of 
tsunami, tsunami hazard signs, evacuation routes, and how to 
recognize and respond to signs of an impending tsunami. In 
addition, under NOAA's voluntary Tsunami Ready Program, a 
community is certified as ``Tsunami Ready'' based on its 
establishment of an emergency operations center, the ability to 
disseminate tsunami warnings, a tsunami hazard plan, community 
awareness, and the ability to receive multiple tsunami 
warnings. As of March 9, 2005, there were 16 Tsunami ready 
communities located throughout the West Coast States and 
Hawaii.
  Another mitigation facet is hazard guidance, which develops 
inundation mapping to determine areas prone to flooding from 
tsunami. This goal of developing inundation maps for every at-
risk coastal community is carried out by NOAA's Center for 
Tsunami Inundation Mapping Efforts (TIME), which works closely 
with the States to develop mapping standards, quality control 
criteria, and certification requirements.
  Continuous improvement of tsunami warnings, mitigation, and 
hazard preparedness efforts require a coordinated research 
program. NOAA's Tsunami Research Program is headquartered at 
the Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory in Seattle, 
Washington. The program provides research support to all 
aspects of the tsunami program in the U.S. This includes the 
continued development of the DART buoy system; inundation 
modeling for TIME; maintaining a database of tsunami events and 
data from these events; tsunami modeling at the Pacific 
Disaster Center and the Maui High Performance Computer Center; 
and other research related to the NTHMP.
  The U.S. system needs to be repaired and expanded to improve 
detection and warning accuracy, and to cover areas not 
currently included. The overall quality of the DART buoys' 
performance has decreased 50 percent over the past 15 months. 
This reduced coverage impaired NOAA's ability both to detect 
and warn of a tsunami and also identify costly false alarms. 
Strengthening reliability of the detection system, and further 
development of a real-time two-way warning system will greatly 
contribute to the security and well-being of U.S. coastal 
communities. Improved mapping and community preparedness is 
also a key component of any effective warning system, and not 
all vulnerable communities have been determined to be tsunami-
ready.
  On January 14, 2005, the Administration announced its plan 
for an improved tsunami warning system throughout the Pacific 
Ocean, the Caribbean Sea, and the mid-Atlantic Ocean, including 
increased preparedness and research activities. On January, 24, 
2005, Senator Inouye and Senator Stevens introduced S. 50, the 
Tsunami Preparedness Act. The Committee reported the bill, with 
an amendment to create a coastal hazard vulnerability program 
on February 2, 2005. The Senate passed S. 50 on July 1, 2005.

                         Summary of Provisions

  S. 1753, the Warning, Alert and Response Network Act, would 
create a National All Hazards Alert System. The bill, as 
amended, also would provide for the creation of the Tsunami 
Warning Program.
  The National Alert System, created under the WARN Act, would 
ensure that regardless of where individuals are or what kind of 
communication technologies they are using, they would receive a 
life-saving alert. Alerts would be transmitted in response to 
all threats to public safety, including natural disasters, man-
made accidents, and terrorist incidents.
  The WARN Act would establish a network for the transmission 
of alerts across a broad variety of communications 
technologies, including wireless communications devices (cell 
phones, Blackberries, etc.), the Internet, digital, analog, 
cable, and satellite television, and satellite and terrestrial 
radio, as well as non-traditional media such as sirens and 
``radios-on-a-stick.'' Alerts would only be allowed for hazards 
that pose a grave risk to public health and safety. This would 
avoid over-activation of the system and individuals ignoring 
alerts (the ``car-alarm'' syndrome).
  The system would provide Federal, State, and local emergency 
managers with a tool to input alerts into the system and have 
them directed out to a geographically targeted section of the 
population. The legislation would require that alerts provide 
individuals with instructions on what to do in response to the 
threat, so as to trigger protective action, not panic.
  The WARN Act would establish a grant program to provide 
assistance to remote communities to install sirens and other 
devices to alert communities, where penetration of the 
telecommunications infrastructure may not be high, ensuring 
that all Americans are protected.

TSUNAMI PREPAREDNESS

  Title II of the bill contains the text of S. 50, the Tsunami 
Preparedness Act, as passed by the Senate on July 1, 2005. The 
bill would authorize NOAA to establish, operate, and maintain a 
dependable national tsunami warning system that would provide 
maximum tsunami detection capability for the nation. The 
provisions of title II would create a system that builds on the 
model established in the Pacific, and provide for its repair, 
expansion, and modernization by the close of calendar year 
2007.
  The system would include 4 components: (1) an expanded and 
upgraded detection and warning system for both the Pacific and 
the Atlantic/Caribbean/Gulf of Mexico regions; (2) a 
modernization and upgrade program for the U.S. system 
(including immediate repair of deep ocean buoys and contractor 
oversight); (3) an expanded Federal-State Tsunami Hazard 
Mitigation Program to improve community outreach and 
preparedness; and (4) a tsunami research program to develop 
improved detection, forecasting, and communications tools. It 
also would establish an Integrated Coastal Vulnerability and 
Adaptation Program focused on improving the resilience of 
coastal communities to natural hazards and disasters. In 
addition, the legislation directs NOAA to provide any necessary 
technical or other assistance to international efforts to 
establish regional systems in other parts of the world, 
including the Indian Ocean. Annual appropriations of $35 
million would be authorized for fiscal years 2006 through 2012 
for the tsunami programs. Five million dollars would be 
authorized annually for the integrated coastal hazards program.

                          Legislative History

  The Warning, Alert and Response Network Act (S. 1753) was 
introduced by Senator DeMint on September 22, 2005, and 
referred to the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and 
Transportation. There are 7 cosponsors of S. 1753: Senators 
Nelson of Nebraska, Stevens, Inouye, Lott, Vitter, Landrieu, 
and Snowe. On October 20, 2005, the Committee considered the 
bill in open Executive Session. Senator Stevens offered an 
amendment in the nature of a substitute, and Mr. DeMint offered 
a manager's amendment to the substitute. Mr. DeMint's amendment 
included tribal governments in the national alert system, 
ensured that the needs of older Americans are incorporated into 
the system, provided for the utilization of the non-commercial 
sustaining announcement program to publicize the national alert 
system, provided greater integration of the National Alert 
Office and the research and development and testing programs, 
and integrated communications infrastructure needs into the 
disaster planning process. The Committee, without objection, 
adopted the substitute and the manager's amendments and ordered 
S. 1753 be reported as amended.

                            Estimated Costs

  In compliance with subsection (a)(3) of paragraph 11 
of rule XXVI of the Standing Rules of the Senate, the Committee 
states that, in its opinion, it is necessary to dispense with 
the requirements of paragraphs (1) and (2) of that subsection 
in order to expedite the business of the Senate. deg.
  In accordance with paragraph 11(a) of rule XXVI of the 
Standing Rules of the Senate and section 403 of the 
Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the Committee provides the 
following cost estimate, prepared by the Congressional Budget 
Office:

                                                  December 1, 2005.
Hon. Ted Stevens,
Chairman, Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has 
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for S. 1753, the National 
Alert System and Tsunami Preparedness Act.
    If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be 
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contacts are Deborah 
Reis and Melissa Z. Petersen.
            Sincerely,
                                               Douglas Holtz-Eakin.
    Enclosure.

S. 1753--National Alert System and Tsunami Preparedness Act

    Summary: S. 1753 would authorize the appropriation of $40 
million a year for each of the fiscal years 2006 through 2012 
for a global tsunami warning and mitigation program 
administered by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric 
Administration (NOAA). The bill also would authorize NOAA to 
oversee the development of a National Alert System (NAS)--a new 
communications network for transmitting emergency information 
to the public--but funding for that program would be contingent 
upon the enactment of separate legislation. (That prospective 
funding would be provided by title III of S. 1932, the Deficit 
Reduction Omnibus Reconciliation Act of 2005, as passed by the 
Senate on November 3, 2005.)
    CBO estimates that implementing S. 1753 would cost $124 
million over the 2006-2010 period and another $156 million 
after 2010, assuming appropriation of the specified amounts for 
the tsunami warning and mitigation program. Enacting S. 1753 
would not have a significant impact on direct spending. The 
bill would not affect revenues. The provisions in S. 1753 
regarding a NAS would have no budgetary impact until another 
law is enacted to fund the activities.
    S. 1753 contains an intergovernmental mandate as defined in 
the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA); however, CBO estimates 
that the costs to the governmental entities would be small and 
would not exceed the threshold established in that act ($62 
million in 2005, adjusted annually for inflation). A provision 
in the bill also would compensate governmental entities for 
costs incurred in complying with the mandate.
    S. 1753 would impose private-sector mandates as defined in 
UMRA on certain licensees and permittees, including all 
commercial mobile service providers and nonprofit television 
broadcasters. Based on information provided by industry and 
government sources, CBO expects that the aggregate direct costs 
of complying with those mandates would be minimal compared to 
the annual threshold established by UMRA for private-sector 
mandates ($123 million in 2005, adjusted annually for 
inflation).
    Estimated cost to the Federal Government: The estimated 
budgetary impact of S. 1753 is shown in the following table. 
The costs of this legislation fall within budget function 300 
(natural resources and environment).

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                       By fiscal year, in millions of dollars--
                                                                    --------------------------------------------
                                                                       2006     2007     2008     2009     2010
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                  CHANGES IN SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION

Title II--Tsunami Preparedness
    Authorization Level............................................       40       40       40       40       40
    Estimated Outlays..............................................        8       16       20       40       40
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note.--Title I of S. 1753 would provide statutory guidelines for a National Alert System that would be funded by
  the Digital Transition and Public Safety Act of 2005, which was included as title III of S. 1932, the Deficit
  Reduction Omnibus Reconciliation Act of 2005, as passed by the Senate. That legislation would provide $250
  million in direct spending authority for such a program.

    Basis of estimate: For this estimate, CBO assumes that S. 
1753 will be enacted during fiscal year 2006 and that the 
entire amounts authorized will be appropriated for each year. 
Estimated outlays are based on historical spending patterns of 
similar programs.

Tsunami preparedness

    Title II of the bill would direct NOAA to establish and 
implement new programs to research, detect, monitor, and 
mitigate the effects of tsunamis in the Pacific and Atlantic 
oceans. The bill would direct the agency to upgrade and improve 
existing systems and data management efforts and would 
authorize it to provide technical and financial aid to those 
affected by tsunamis, including local and international 
entities. For those purposes, the bill would authorize the 
appropriation of $40 million for each of fiscal years 2006 
through 2012, including $8 million annually for pilot projects 
to assess the vulnerability of coastal areas of the United 
States. Some of the costs of carrying out a program for tsunami 
warning and mitigation may be offset by reimbursements from 
other countries participating in the program, but CBO estimates 
that such reimbursements would be less than $500,000 annually.

National Alert System

    Title I of S. 1753 would authorize NOAA to establish a 
National Alert System, which would coordinate existing 
emergency communication systems and use multiple technologies 
for communicating emergency information. Under S. 1753, funding 
for the NAS program would be contingent on the enactment of 
separate legislation. That other legislation--the Digital 
Transition and Public Safety Act of 2005, which was included as 
title III of S. 1932, the Deficit Reduction Omnibus 
Reconciliation Act of 2005 as passed by the Senate--would allow 
the Department of Commerce to spend $250 million for a NAS 
program without further appropriation.
    S. 1753 would not authorize appropriations for the NAS 
program, nor would it provide direct spending authority for the 
activities. If both S. 1753 and S. 1932 are enacted, however, 
S. 1753 could affect the timing of direct spending under the 
authority provided by S. 1932 because it would set statutory 
guidelines for implementing the NAS. For example, the bill 
would direct NOAA to certify and train public agencies having 
access to the system; reimburse broadcasters for certain 
expenses related to the program; and fund research and 
development, public outreach, and grants to remote communities 
to implement the system. Such directives could change the 
timing of program outlays if the nature of those activities 
differed from those that would have been undertaken by the 
department in the absence of this bill.
    Estimated impact on State, local, and tribal governments: 
S. 1753 contains an intergovernmental mandate as defined by 
UMRA. The bill would require public broadcasting stations to 
install necessary equipment to enable the reception, relay, and 
retransmission of alerts by the National Alert System. CBO 
estimates that aggregate costs for those stations to comply 
would require the National Alert Office to compensate public 
broadcasting stations for costs incurred in complying with the 
mandate.
    S. 1753 also would establish and implement new programs to 
research, detect, monitor, and mitigate the effects of tsunamis 
in the Pacific and Atlantic oceans. Coastal states and local 
communities would benefit from the programs and grants 
authorized in this bill; any costs they face to participate in 
those programs would be incurred voluntarily.
    Estimated impact on the private sector: S. 1753 would 
impose private-sector mandates as defined in UMRA on certain 
licensee and permittees, including all commercial mobile 
service providers and nonprofit television broadcasters. Based 
on information provided by industry and government sources, CBO 
expects that the aggregate direct costs of complying with those 
mandates would be minimal compared to the annual threshold 
established by UMRA for private-sector mandates ($123 million 
in 2005, adjusted annually for inflation).
    Section 103 of the bill would require any licensee 
providing commercial mobile service to make an election of 
whether or not they will participate in the transmission of 
National Alert System alerts. Currently, mobile service 
providers are not required to make this election. Thus, this 
provision would constitute a new enforceable duty on the 
private sector.
    Those providers choosing not to participate would be 
required to inform consumers at the point of sale with a clear 
disclosure stating that alert transmissions will not be 
provided by their service. Although not specified in the 
legislation, government sources have explained that such 
disclosures could take many forms such as written documents, 
contracts, signs, etc. CBO estimates that the direct costs for 
such disclosures would be minimal.
    Those providers electing to participate in the transmission 
of NAS alerts would be required to follow future FCC 
regulations and certify to the commission that they will follow 
the standards and protocols implemented by the National Alert 
Office. Due to uncertainty about future rulemaking and 
protocols, the direct costs of participating in NAS alert 
transmissions is unknown and those costs could be greater than 
the option of not participating. CBO assumes that those 
providers electing to participate in such transmission would do 
so because the net benefit of participating would be greater 
than that of not participating.
    Section 103 also would require nonprofit broadcasting 
stations to install necessary equipment to enable the 
reception, relay, and retransmission of alerts by the National 
Alert System. According to government and industry sources, 
most nonprofit broadcasting stations currently broadcast 
digital transmissions and could transmit such alerts by 
purchasing an alerts receiver. Consequently, CBO estimates that 
the aggregate costs for those stations to comply would be 
minimal. The bill also would require the National Alert Office 
to compensate public broadcasting stations for costs incurred 
in complying with this mandate.
    Previous CBO estimates: On March 17, 2005, CBO transmitted 
a cost estimate for S. 50, the Tsunami Preparedness Act, as 
ordered reported by the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, 
and Transportation on March 17, 2005. S. 50 is nearly identical 
to title II of S. 1753, which addresses tsunami preparedness 
programs to be carried out by NOAA. The estimated costs of the 
two versions of the legislation are identical except for 2006, 
reflecting a later assumed enactment date for S. 1753. Title II 
of S. 1753 is also similar to H.R. 1674, the United States 
Tsunami Warning and Education Act, as ordered reported by the 
House Committee on Science on May 4, 2005. Our estimate for the 
House bill, transmitted on May 12, 2005, reflected the lower 
authorizations levels of that version.
    On October 24, 2005, CBO transmitted a cost estimate for 
the Digital Transition and Public Safety Act of 2005, as 
approved by the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and 
Transportation on October 20, 2005. The spending authorized in 
S. 1753 for the National Alert System would be derived from a 
fund that would be created by the Digital Transition and Public 
Safety Act of 2005, which was included as title III of S. 1932, 
the Deficit Reduction Omnibus Reconciliation Act of 2005, as 
passed by the Senate on November 3, 2005.
    Estimate prepared by: Federal Costs: Deborah Reis and 
Melissa Z. Petersen. Impact on State, Local, and Tribal 
Governments: Lisa Ramirez-Branum. Impact on the Private Sector: 
Craig Cammarata.
    Estimate approved by: Peter H. Fontaine, Deputy Assistant 
Director for Budget Analysis.

                      Regulatory Impact Statement

  In compliance with subsection (b)(2) of paragraph 11 
of rule XXVI of the Standing Rules of the Senate, the Committee 
states that, in its opinion, it is necessary to dispense with 
the requirements of paragraph (1) of that subsection in order 
to expedite the business of the Senate. deg.
  Because S. ------ does not create any new programs, 
the legislation will have no additional regulatory impact, and 
will result in no additional reporting requirements. The 
legislation will have no further effect on the number or types 
of individuals and businesses regulated, the economic impact of 
such regulation, the personal privacy of affected individuals, 
or the paperwork required from such individuals and 
businesses. deg.
  In accordance with paragraph 11(b) of rule XXVI of the 
Standing Rules of the Senate, the Committee provides the 
following evaluation of the regulatory impact of the 
legislation, as reported:

                       NUMBER OF PERSONS COVERED

  The bill would provide for the voluntary participation in a 
national all-hazards alert system. The bill would only effect 
individuals to the extent that a communications technology they 
utilize participates in the National Alert System. The bill 
would require emergency management personnel seeking 
credentials under section 103 of the Act, to comply with 
regulations on the appropriate use of the National Alert 
System.

                            ECONOMIC IMPACT

  S. 1753 would not have an adverse economic impact on the 
nation's economy. The Act would create a national all-hazards 
alerting system and protect citizens from the impact of 
tsunamis. The legislation authorizes the expenditure of 
$250,000,000 from the Digital Transition and Public Safety Fund 
in accordance with section 5 of the Digital Transition and 
Public Safety Act of 2005.

                                PRIVACY

  The reported bill would have little, if any, impact on the 
personal privacy of U.S. citizens.

                               PAPERWORK

  The reported bill should not significantly increase paperwork 
requirements for individuals and businesses. Section 104(c) of 
the Act would require the National Alert Office to submit and 
annual report to the President and Congress and a 5-year report 
to the President and Congress.

                      Section-by-Section Analysis


Section 101. Short title.

  Section 101 would establish the short title of the bill as 
the ``Warning, Alert, and Response Network Act.''

Section 102. National Alert System.

  Section 102 would provide for the establishment of a national 
alerting system. The section also describes the functional 
characteristics and capabilities of the system. It is the 
Committee's intention that the system leverage and enhance the 
existing warning capabilities of the Federal, State and local 
governments. The Committee believes the system should 
incorporate the broadest variety of communications 
technologies, including digital and analog broadcast radio and 
television, cable and satellite television, satellite and 
terrestrial radio, wireless communications--including personal 
digital assistants, cellular telephones, and pagers--wireline 
communications, the Internet, as well as solutions such as 
sirens and indoor and outdoor alerting technologies that 
utilize intelligible voice messaging. Additionally, the system 
should incorporate the existing emergency alert system, NOAA 
All-Hazards Radio system, as well as systems deployed by State, 
tribal and local governments. Finally the legislation 
anticipates that technology will evolve and instructs that the 
system be designed in a manner that allows for the inclusion of 
new technologies in the future.
  The Committee encourages the National Alert Office to design 
the National Alert System in such a manner that the alerts 
transmitted across the system are capable of being 
retransmitted by satellite radio licensees. Additionally, the 
Committee encourages the National Alert Office to design the 
National Alert System in such a manner as to allow alerts to be 
retransmitted to personal computers. The personal computing 
industry should proactively engage the National Alert Office to 
ensure that the unique needs of the personal computing 
community are taken into account in the system's architecture 
and design. Finally the Committee understands that traditional 
broadcast television and radio play a crucial role in alerting 
individuals to threats to their community. It is the 
expectation of the Committee that the National Alert System 
should be designed to leverage existing resources that have 
already been deployed by broadcasters for transmission of 
emergency alert system messages.
  Section 102(a) would establish the National Alert System.
  Section 102(b) would outline the functions of the system, 
which are to: (1) allow appropriately credentialed Federal, 
State or local officials to use the system for threats that 
pose an imminent risk to public health or safety; (2) ensure 
coordination with existing warning systems; (3) ensure that the 
system is designed in such a manner as to target alerts to a 
small population and avoid over-alerting; and (4) ensure the 
system incorporates a broad variety of media so that the public 
is exposed to an alert regardless of what type of 
communications technologies they use.
  Section 102(c) would detail the capabilities of the system, 
which include: (1) the requirement that the system incorporate 
multiple technologies and be capable of incorporating future 
technologies; (2) the capability of being used by individuals 
with disabilities; (3) lack of interference and incorporation 
of existing alert systems; (4) the use of multiple technology 
platforms such as the Internet, cell phones, blackberries, 
etc.; (5) being capable of including technologies to serve 
rural and remote communities; (6) the capability of providing 
alerts in languages other than English; and (7) a design to 
promote community preparedness and response.
  Section 102(d) would outline that the system should include 
alert mechanisms that do not require public activation and that 
alerts should be sent out over multiple communication 
technologies.
  Section 102(e) would direct the Director of the National 
Alert System to ensure that the National Alert System 
complements the existing Federal alerting systems, including 
the Emergency Alert System (EAS) and NOAA All Hazards Radio.
    Section 102(f) would direct the Federal Communications 
Commission (FCC) to conclude its pending proceeding on the 
Digital Emergency Alert System, would allow the Secretary of 
Homeland Security and the Governors to access EAS, and would 
ensure that EAS alerts are also transmitted in languages other 
than English.

Section 103. Implementation and use.

  Section 103 would provide guidelines for the implementation 
of the system, participation in the system, and guidelines for 
its use.
  Section 103(a) outlines the process for credentialing 
emergency managers to use the system. Under this section the 
National Alert Office would establish a procedure to provide 
Federal, State, tribal, and local government officials with 
credentials access to the National Alert System to send alerts 
to the public. The legislation requires the head of a Federal 
agency to submit the names of individuals they believe need to 
access the system (e.g. NOAA would submit to the National Alert 
Office the names of meteorologists who need the authority to 
transmit alerts across the system). The governor of a State or 
the leader of a federally-recognized tribe would transmit the 
names of individuals who they believe need to have access to 
the system. The Committee expects that the governors would 
transmit to the National Alert Office for approval both 
recommendations from the various political subdivisions within 
their State and the names of officials with statewide 
authority. The Committee encourages the governors to submit the 
names of relevant and appropriate fire chiefs--along with other 
public safety personnel--for credentialing, so that the chiefs 
may continue to issue warnings that are within their purview. 
While the National Alert Office should give deference to the 
requests from the governors, there is an expectation that the 
requests will be limited to relatively senior individuals 
within the emergency management community.
  This section also would charge the National Alert Office with 
outlining what group of individuals would have credentials and 
what authority those credentials would grant. The credentials 
would be limited to the individual's geographic area of 
responsibility (e.g. a meteorologist assigned to a Weather 
Forecast Office in Sterling, Virginia will not have the 
authority to issue an alert in California), as well as their 
subject matter area of expertise (e.g. an emergency manager 
responsible for hazardous materials response would not have the 
authority to issue an alert regarding severe weather). The 
Committee understands that emergency management personnel are 
often responsible for responding to a variety of threats and 
the credentialing procedure should accommodate that reality.
  Finally, training would be a crucial component of the 
responsible and effective use of the system. While the system 
has the potential to save lives, its use in situations where 
life is not in jeopardy could degrade the effectiveness of the 
warning system. To that end, the legislation would require that 
users of the system undergo training to receive their 
credentials and periodic training to maintain their 
credentials.
  Section 103(b) would task the Office with outlining the class 
of events that can trigger an alert to be sent across the 
system. Because of the serious threat to the system posed by 
over-use, the Office should craft regulations that ensure that 
the alerts are only transmitted during serious emergency 
circumstances, and for testing the system. It is the 
Committee's expectation that the Office would craft regulations 
that provide clear guidance to credentialed users, and the 
public, on when an alert will and will not be sent across the 
system. Specifically the Committee would anticipate that the 
Office may want to allow the use of alerts to publicize the 
provision of life-saving resources such as emergency shelter 
during an evacuation or water and ice after a disaster.
  Finally the section allows the establishment of a procedure 
for the transmission of non-critical alert information, such as 
traffic, school closure, and non-severe weather information. 
The transmittal of optional alerts should proceed in a manner 
that does not interfere with the transmission of emergency 
alerts. Additionally, receipt of optional alerts should require 
an individual to elect to receive those alerts. Alerts under 
this section could include emails distributed by a local school 
district, the subscription to a fee-based, value-added service, 
or the receipt of messages on a wireless device which could be 
treated similar to other non-emergency related traffic.
  Section 103(b) would outline requirements for emergency 
alerts that would be transmitted across the system. The section 
would outline that only alerts that pose an imminent threat to 
public safety should be transmitted across the system. The 
section also would instruct the Director of the National Alert 
Office to promulgate regulations that outline what type of 
alerts may be transmitted across the system and provide 
guidance on the content of these alerts. The section also would 
provide that the backbone of the system could be used for the 
retransmission of alerts that do not deal with imminent threats 
to public health and safety, but any such alerts must be 
transmitted in a manner that does not interfere with an 
emergency alert. In addition, the section would specify that 
individuals would have to take some affirmative action, such as 
subscribing to a service, to receive these alerts.
  Section 103(c) would task the National Alert Office with 
designing a system that would provide a mechanism for emergency 
managers at all levels of government to input appropriate 
alerts into the system and have them distributed through the 
various delivery mechanisms. This could include the integration 
of software tools into disaster management and weather 
forecasting software, or a secure web portal where appropriate 
alerts could be entered.
  Section 103(c) would require that there be multiple access 
points for emergency managers to input alerts into the system 
and that the system be redundant and secure.
  Section 103(d) would describe a two-fold process in which the 
FCC is required to initiate a proceeding, after technical 
standards have been adopted by the National Alert Office, to 
allow wireless providers to participate in the National Alert 
System and retransmit alerts. After the FCC issues an order, 
wireless providers would elect either to provide the alerts to 
all their customers, or not to participate. If they do not 
participate, they must disclose clearly and conspicuously at 
the point of sale of their devices that they do not 
participate. If participating providers want, they may provide 
mechanisms for wireless devices to allow customers to block 
most alerts from the system. The section also provides for the 
Commission to develop a procedure for carriers to withdraw from 
the system and enter at a date later than the first election.
  Finally, section 103(d)(3) would provide a mechanism for the 
FCC to institute a proceeding similar to that outlined in 
section 103(d)(1) and (2) for licensees other than those 
covered by section 332(d)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934 
(47 U.S.C. 332(d)(1)), who would serve significant portions of 
the population and would be logical providers of alerts through 
the National Alerting System.
  Section 103(d) would detail how wireless providers would 
elect to participate in the system. The section would provide a 
voluntary system where wireless providers decide whether or not 
they wish to offer their customers alerts through the National 
Alerting System. Under this subsection: (1) 60 days after the 
National Alert Office adopts the technical standards for the 
system, the FCC would initiate a proceeding to allow a 
commercial mobile service licensee to transmit System alerts 
and would require those who elect not to participate to 
disclose to their customers in a clear and conspicuous manner 
that the devices they sell would not transmit alerts; and (2) 
within 30 days of the conclusion of the FCC proceeding, 
wireless carriers would file an election with the FCC 
indicating whether or not they wish to transmit alerts. If they 
elect to participate, they would agree to do so in a manner 
consistent with the standards and protocols of the system and 
periodically test their equipment. The section also clarifies 
that carriers would have the authority to advertise that they 
transmit alerts and would set up a procedure for providers to 
withdraw from or enter the system at a later date. The section 
would give the carriers the authority to install technology in 
their wireless devices that would allow customers to block most 
alerts if they wish. This section also would provide the FCC 
with the authority to expand the class of licensees 
participating beyond just commercial mobile service to other 
technologies if necessary.
  Section 103(e) would build on the work of the Integrated 
Public Alert and Warning System (IPAWS) pilot project which 
uses a portion of the bandwidth used by digital public 
television licensees to transmit alerts. This section would 
require such licensees and permittees to install necessary 
equipment for the purpose of broadcasting alerts which would 
then be received and retransmitted by the communication 
technologies contemplated by the Act to their customers.
  Section 103(e) would provide for the use of digital public 
television towers to serve as a backbone for the distribution 
of alerts. Public television stations have agreed to segregate 
a portion of their broadcast spectrum for broadcast of Internet 
protocol formatted alerts, which would then be received and 
retransmitted by various communication providers.
  Section 103(f) would promote industry participation in the 
National Alert System by protecting participants from liability 
related to ``any act or omission related to any harm from the 
transmission of, or failure to transmit'' an alert. This 
protection could cover: (1) the transmission of, or failure to 
transmit, a System alert; (2) incorrect or confusing content of 
a System alert; (3) the failure, deficiency, or malfunction of 
any network, equipment, or facility of the provider or any 
other person, or the lack of coverage or network capacity in 
connection with the transmission or receipt of a System alert; 
(4) the failure to receive an alert because a subscriber's 
service may have been suspended or discontinued for payment-
related or similar reasons; (5) the unavailability of any 
network, equipment, or facility of the provider or any other 
person used to provide a System alert; and (6) a person's 
election to activate a technology in their devices to block 
alerts from the National Alert System.
  To ensure that the system works appropriately, section 103(g) 
would provide for a testing regime to be administered by the 
Director of the Alert Office.

Section 104. National Alert Office.

  Section 104(a) would provide for the establishment of a 
National Alert Office: (1) within NOAA; (2) led by a Director 
with significant emergency alerting experience; and (3) staffed 
by individuals with significant experience in the 
telecommunications industry and detailees from other Federal 
agencies. Additionally, the Committee stresses the need for the 
Office to have staff detailed to the Office from the Department 
of Homeland Security and the Federal Emergency Management 
Agency, so that the concerns and expertise of those agencies 
could be incorporated in the design, management, and operation 
of the system.
  Section 104(b) would detail the functions and 
responsibilities for the Office which include: (1) the 
administration and operation of the system; (2) the 
implementation of the National Alert System Working Group's 
recommendations on the technical aspects of the system; (3) 
that the Director of the Office ensure that the system is 
available only to credentialed personnel; (4) that it provide 
geographically targeted alerts; (5) that alerts are verified 
before transmission and comply with adopted protocols and 
standards; and (6) that the security of the system and the 
various alerts is maintained.
  Section 104(c) would require the Office to keep Congress 
abreast of its operations and plans by publishing annual 
reports and a 5-year plan.
  Section 104(d) would task GAO to audit periodically the 
National Alert Office and tasks the Alert Office to respond in 
its annual report to any adverse findings in the GAO audit.

Section 105. National Alert System Working Group.

  Section 105 would establish the National Alert System Working 
Group. The section would outline a procedure where a diverse 
group of experts, with extensive practical experience in their 
area of expertise, would develop detailed recommendations for 
the protocols and standards for the system, procedures for 
verifying, modifying and canceling alerts transmitted across 
the system, guidelines for the technical capabilities of the 
system as well as technical capabilities for priority 
transmittal of alerts, standards for equipment to be used by 
the system, and other technical issues that need to be 
addressed by the system.
  The Working Group should pay particular attention to existing 
Federal, State and local systems and the associated protocols 
and procedures, and when appropriate, build upon those systems, 
procedures, and protocols that have demonstrated their 
effectiveness.
  The Director would appoint members of the Working Group from 
3 primary groups: Federal personnel; State, local and tribal 
personnel; and subject matter experts from industry. It is the 
Committee's expectation that all parties on the Working Group 
would work cooperatively to develop a solution that properly 
balances emergency management needs and technical capabilities.

FEDERAL REPRESENTATIVES

  Under section 105(b)(2) the Director would appoint 
representatives from Federal agencies that have significant 
responsibility for emergency management and public alerting. 
The Committee anticipates significant representation from the 
Department of Homeland Security and the Federal Emergency 
Management Agency. The Director also should draw upon the 
standards development expertise of the National Institute for 
Standards and Technology (NIST) when constituting the Working 
Group. The Committee expects that all agency representatives 
would participate fully in the Working Group and bring their 
particular expertise to the Working Group to ensure its 
effectiveness.

STATE AND LOCAL REPRESENTATIVES

  Under section 105(b)(3) the Director of the National Alert 
Office would appoint State and local personnel with practical 
experience in emergency management. These individuals would 
provide important guidance on what type of capabilities the 
emergency management community would need to respond to a 
disaster. The section provides a mechanism for national 
organizations representing State and local governments and 
emergency management personnel to nominate individuals for 
inclusion on the Working Group. It is the Committee's 
expectation that individuals with extensive practical 
experience would be nominated and that the Director would show 
significant deference to those nominations.

TRIBAL REPRESENTATIVES

  Under section 105(b)(4) the Director would appoint 
individuals from tribal governments upon the recommendation of 
the elected leader of a federally recognized tribe.

SUBJECT MATTER EXPERTS

  Section 105(b)(5) would direct the Director to appoint 
subject matter experts to the Working Group from various 
sectors of the telecommunications industry. The Director should 
appoint a sufficient number of subject matter experts to ensure 
that there is broad representation of all sectors of the 
telecommunications industry who would be participating in the 
National Alert System. Specifically the Committee would expect 
that there be representation of wireless telecommunication 
providers, the public television stations, telecommunications 
hardware and software manufacturers and developers, 
manufacturers of mass notification systems using intelligible 
voice messaging, satellite radio and television, cable 
television, and members of the broadcast industry. The 
Committee does not intend this to be an exhaustive list and 
encourages the Director to appoint as many individuals as 
necessary to assure that there is the necessary expertise to 
ensure the effective design, development and operation of the 
system.
  Section 105(c) would outline the duties of the Working Group. 
While the final authority for the adoption of the 
recommendations of the Working Group would rest with the 
Director, it is the expectation of the Committee that the 
Director consider carefully the recommendations of the Working 
Group. It is also the expectation of the Committee that the 
Working Group produce a detailed and practical plan that can be 
implemented by the Director to establish a National Alerting 
System.
  Section 105(c)(2) would instruct the Working Group to work 
with the operators of nuclear facilities and other critical 
infrastructure facilities. For example, the Committee is aware 
that the Department of Defense and other entities use mass 
notifications systems with intelligible voice messaging over 
personal computing devices and intelligible speaker arrays to 
notify their personnel and the public at large with real-time 
information in an endangered area during emergencies. The 
Committee would encourage the Working Group to coordinate with 
these entities to the extent possible.
  Section 105(d) would outline the procedure for the meeting of 
the Working Group.
  Section 105(e) would ensure that the Working Group would have 
access to resources from Federal agencies and would be able to 
accept gifts and grants.
  Section 105(f) would outline the rules for the Working Group 
and provide it with the authority to have subcommittees.
  Section 105(g) would exempt the Working Group from the 
Federal Advisory Committee Act.

Section 106. Research and development.

  Section 106 would establish an extramural research and 
development program lead by the Director of the National Alert 
Office to develop the technologies necessary to enable 
communication providers to retransmit alerts from the system. 
The research and development program should focus its primary 
attention on developing technologies for the delivery of 
geographically targeted alerts over wireless devices.
  The Committee intends that the research and development 
program include a broad variety of participants in addition to 
participants from industry. The Committee stresses that NIST 
has extensive expertise that could be offered to the research 
and development program and would strongly encourage the 
National Alert Office to work with NIST to ensure their 
participation.
  The Committee also notes that there is a lack of research 
into the content of an alert and how to draft an alert 
effectively so that its direction would be heeded by the 
public. Section 106(b)(2)(C) would provide the authority and 
direction to conduct a research program to increase the 
understanding of and response to warnings. The Committee 
encourages the Office to conduct a program of sociological and 
behavior research into the response to warnings and alerts to 
ensure the most effective response to National Alert System 
alerts.
  Section 106(b) would detail the functions of the research and 
development program specifying that it may include industry, 
government and academia, and that the research program should 
develop innovative technologies, enhance participation, improve 
response to warnings and enhance the integration of the alert 
system into local community emergency management programs.
  Section 106(c) instructs the research program to take 
advantage of the expertise of NIST.

Section 107. Grant program for remote community alert systems.

  Section 107(a) would instruct the Administrator of NOAA to 
establish a grant program to provide for the installation of 
technologies in remote communities to ensure that they are 
effectively alerted. This could include, for example, the 
installation of sirens in rural communities or the installation 
of radio-receiving sirens on beaches to alert vacationers.
  Section 107(b) would establish the procedures for efficient 
management and execution of the grant program.
  Section 107(c) sunsets the program after 5 years.

Section 108. Public familiarization, outreach, and response 
        instructions.

  Section 108 would provide the National Alert Office with the 
authority to conduct a public outreach program to familiarize 
the public with the National Alert System. The Committee would 
encourage the Office to develop a program that utilizes the 
various outreach tools specified in the bill, as well as other 
tools they deem appropriate, in a manner that is most effective 
and has the highest impact. The Committee has no preference for 
any one outreach mechanism and encourages the Office to craft 
an outreach program that best informs the public.

Section 109. Telecommunications infrastructure restoration, 
        preparedness, and response.

  Section 109 outlines procedures for providing for the prompt 
and effective restoration of emergency services in the wake of 
a disaster and provides a planning mechanism to ensure that 
communications infrastructure is part of the disaster planning 
process.

Section 110. Definitions.

  Section 110 defines Director, Office, National Alert System, 
and Working Group.

Section 111. Funding.

  Section 111 would provide for funding to be made available 
from the proceeds from the auction of spectrum as provided in 
S. 1932, the Deficit Reduction Omnibus Reconciliation Act of 
2005. The Committee expects that after research and development 
and establishment of the system occur that NOAA would provide 
funding for the operation and maintenance of the system in 
their annual budget request.

Section 201. Short title.

  Section 201 would establish that title II of the bill shall 
be referred to as the ``Tsunami Preparedness Act.''

Section 202. Findings and purposes.

  Section 202(a) would set forth the findings for the Act.
  Section 202(b) would set forth the purposes of the act, which 
are to: (1) improve tsunami detection, forecast, warnings, 
notification, preparedness, and mitigation in the United States 
and elsewhere in the world; (2) improve the existing Pacific 
Tsunami Warning System and expand detection and warning systems 
to other vulnerable States and United States territories, 
including the Caribbean/Atlantic/Gulf region; (3) increase and 
accelerate mapping, modeling, research, assessment, education, 
and outreach efforts; (4) provide technical and other 
assistance to speed international efforts to establish regional 
tsunami warning systems in vulnerable areas worldwide; and (5) 
improve Federal, State, and international coordination for 
tsunami and other coastal hazard warnings, and preparedness.

Section 203. Tsunami detection and warning system.

  Section 203(a) would direct the Administrator of NOAA to 
operate regional tsunami warning systems for the Pacific Ocean 
region and the region encompassing the Atlantic Ocean, 
Caribbean, and Gulf of Mexico.
  Section 203(b) would state that the system would consist of 
both a Pacific tsunami warning system, to cover the entire 
Pacific Ocean area, including the Western, Central, North, 
Eastern, South, and Arctic areas, as well as an Atlantic and 
Caribbean system. The Atlantic and Caribbean system would cover 
areas that the Administrator determines to be geologically 
active or have the potential for geological activity, and pose 
measurable risks of tsunamis for States along the coastal areas 
of the Atlantic Ocean or the Gulf of Mexico. The section also 
would state that the system would: (1) utilize an array of deep 
ocean detection buoys; (2) include an associated tide gauge 
system; (3) include any other sensors needed for tsunami and 
weather warnings and forecasts; (4) provide for cooperation 
between NOAA and USGS; (5) provide for information and data 
processing through the tsunami warning centers; (6) be 
integrated into United States and global ocean and earth 
observing systems, including the Global Earth Observing System 
of Systems; and (7) provide an infrastructure, building on 
local systems, for at-risk tsunami communities that supports 
rapid and reliable alert notices to the public. This section 
also would direct the Administrator to leverage assistance and 
assets of the U.S. Coast Guard and U.S. Navy in deploying and 
maintaining detection buoys.
  Section 203(c) would direct the Administrator to establish 
tsunami warning centers to provide a link between detection and 
warning systems and the tsunami hazard mitigation program, 
including the Pacific Tsunami Warning Center in Hawaii and the 
West Coast/Alaska Tsunami Warning Center in Alaska. The 
responsibilities of these centers would include: (1) continuous 
monitoring of data from seismological stations, deep ocean 
buoys, and tidal monitoring stations and providing such data to 
the national tsunami archive; (2) evaluating earthquakes that 
have the potential to generate a tsunami; (3) evaluating other 
deep ocean buoy and tidal monitoring station data; and (4) 
disseminating information and warning bulletins for local and 
distant tsunamis.
  Section 203(d) would direct the Administrator to maintain a 
national and regional data management system to address the 
data requirements of the tsunami detection and monitoring 
system including: (1) quality control and assurance; (2) 
archival and maintenance of data; (3) support the integration 
of data from the tsunami observation system with data from 
other observation systems; and (4) support the development and 
access of data products to the assessment and adaptation 
programs covered in section 208.

Section 204. Tsunami hazard mitigation program.

  Section 204(a) would authorize the Administrator to conduct a 
community-based tsunami hazard mitigation program to improve 
tsunami preparedness in at-risk areas.
  Section 204(b) would require the Administrator to establish a 
coordinating committee consisting of representatives of NOAA, 
USGS, NSF, NIST, and affected coastal States and territories. 
This section envisions the inclusion of State, local and non-
governmental entities, such as academic institutions, in the 
program.
  Section 204(c) would set forth the components of the tsunami 
hazard mitigation program, which would: (1) improve the quality 
and extent of inundation mapping; (2) promote and improve 
community outreach and education networks and programs; (3) 
integrate tsunami awareness, preparedness and mitigation 
programs into ongoing hazard warnings and risk management 
programs in affected areas; (4) promote the adoption of tsunami 
warning and mitigation measures by Federal, State, tribal, and 
local government and non-government entities; (5) develop 
tsunami specific rescue and recovery guidelines; (6) require 
budget coordination through the Administration to ensure that 
participating agencies provide necessary funds; and (7) provide 
for periodic external review of the program.

Section 205. Tsunami research program.

  Section 205(a) would require the Administrator to establish, 
in coordination with other agencies and academic institutions, 
a tsunami research program to develop detection, prediction, 
communication, and mitigation science and technology that 
supports tsunami forecasts and warnings. This program would 
include sensing techniques, tsunami tracking, and forecast 
modeling to: (1) help determine whether an earthquake or 
seismic event will result in a tsunami, and the likely path, 
severity, duration and travel time of a tsunami; (2) develop 
techniques and technologies that may be used to quickly and 
effectively communicate tsunami warnings and forecasts; (3) 
develop techniques and technologies to support evacuation 
products; and (4) develop techniques for utilizing remote 
sensing technologies in rescue and recovery situations.
  Section 205(b) would direct the Administrator, in 
consultation with other appropriate Federal agencies, to 
investigate the potential for improved technology for tsunami 
and other hazard warnings to the public.

Section 206. Tsunami system upgrade and modernization.

  Section 206(a) would direct the Administrator to: (1) 
authorize the direct and immediate repair of existing deep 
ocean detection buoys; (2) ensure the deployment of an array of 
deep ocean detection buoys; and (3) ensure expansion and 
upgrade of the tide gauge network.
  Section 206(b) would set forth requirements for the 
Administrator in carrying out this section with respect to the 
transfer of technology, maintenance, and upgrades, including: 
(1) promulgating specifications and standards for forecast, 
detection, and warning systems; (2) developing and executing a 
plan for the transfer of technology from ongoing research to 
long-term operations; (3) ensuring the maintenance and 
operation of detection equipment; (4) obtaining priority 
treatment in budgeting for acquiring, transporting, and 
maintenance of tsunami detection system equipment; and (5) 
ensuring the integration of the tsunami detection system with 
other United States and global and coastal observation systems.
  Section 206(c) would require that before appropriated amounts 
are obligated or expended for the acquisition of services for 
construction or deployment of tsunami detection equipment, the 
Administrator must certify to the Senate Committee on Commerce, 
Science, and Transportation, and the House of Representatives 
Committees on Science and Resources within 60 calendar days 
after the President submits the Budget of the United States 
that: (1) each contractor has met contract requirements; (2) 
that constructed equipment is capable of becoming fully 
operational without additional expenditures of appropriated 
funds; and (3) that there are no foreseeable delays in 
deployment and operation.
  Section 206(d) would require that the Administrator notify 
the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, 
and the House of Representatives Committees on Science and 
Resources of impaired regional detection coverage due to 
equipment or system failure, and significant contractor 
failures or delays in completing work associated with the 
tsunami detection and warning system.
  Section 206(e) would require the Administrator to submit an 
annual report to the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and 
Transportation, and the House of Representatives Committee on 
Science, on the status of the tsunami detection and warning 
system.
  Section 206(f) would require the National Academy of Sciences 
to review the tsunami detection, forecast, and warning system, 
and transmit a report on its findings and recommendations to 
the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, 
and the House of Representatives Committee on Science within 24 
months after the date of enactment.

Section 207. Global tsunami warning and mitigation network.

  Section 207(a) would require the Administrator, in 
coordination with the other members of the United States 
Interagency Committee of the National Tsunami Mitigation 
Program, to provide technical assistance and advice to the 
Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission of UNESCO, the World 
Meteorological Organization, and other international entities, 
as part of international efforts to develop a fully functional 
global tsunami warning system.
  Section 207(b) would direct the Administrator to establish 
and operate an International Tsunami Information Center 
(Center) for all nations participating in the International 
Tsunami Warning System of the Pacific and other nations 
participating in UNESCO's global tsunami warning system. The 
Center's responsibilities would include: (1) monitoring 
international tsunami warnings in the Pacific; (2) assisting 
member States in establishing their own tsunami warning 
systems; (3) maintaining a library of tsunami related materials 
for use by the global scientific community; and (4) 
dissemination of tsunami related information.
  Section 207(c) would direct the Administrator to give 
priority to assisting nations in identifying vulnerable coastal 
areas, creating inundation maps, obtaining and designing 
detection and reporting equipment, and establishing 
communication and warning networks. It also states that the 
Administrator may establish a process for the transfer of 
detection and communication technology to affected nations in 
order to establish an international tsunami warning system and 
that the Administrator would provide technical and other 
assistance to support international tsunami education, 
response, vulnerability, and adaptation programs.
  Section 207(d) would prohibit the Administrator from 
providing assistance for any region unless all affected nations 
in that region participating in the tsunami warning network 
agree to share relevant data associated with the development 
and operation of the network.
  Section 207(e) would direct the Administrator, in 
coordination with the Secretary of State, to seek financial 
assistance from participating nations in order to ensure a 
fully functional global tsunami warning system.
  Section 207(f) would allow the Administrator to accept 
payment to, or reimbursement of NOAA from, or on the behalf of, 
international organizations and foreign authorities, for 
expenses incurred by the Administrator in carrying out any 
activity under this act.

Section 208. Coastal community vulnerability and adaptation program.

  Section 208(a) would direct the Administrator to establish an 
Integrated Coastal Vulnerability and Adaptation Program focused 
on improving the resilience of coastal communities to natural 
hazards and disasters. Six areas of activity are suggested: (1) 
development of vulnerability maps for coastal communities to a 
wide array of potential hazards; (2) efforts to better 
integrate risk management with community planning; (3) risk 
management leadership training for public officials; (4) 
development of risk assessment technologies; (5) new data 
services to support the new risk management activities; and (6) 
new risk notification systems.
  Section 208(b) would direct the Administrator to begin 3 
regional pilot projects incorporating the activities described 
in section 208(a). These projects should begin no more than one 
year after the enactment of this bill and provide regional 
assessments of U.S. coastal vulnerability to hazards associated 
with tsunami and other natural hazards or coastal disasters. 
Regional assessments should consider the social, physical, and 
economic impacts of such hazards. The assessments should also 
include a description of ways to enhance the resilience of at-
risk communities, economic sectors and natural resources.
  Section 208(c) would identify the selection criteria to be 
used in picking appropriate regional pilot projects. These 
would include: (1) vulnerability to the hazards discussed 
above; (2) dependence on economic sectors and resources that 
may be particularly at risk; (3) opportunities to link and use 
existing risk management programs; (4) evidence of strong 
interagency collaboration in the area of risk management for 
tsunami and other natural hazards or coastal disasters; and (5) 
access to NOAA and other Federal programs, facilities, and 
infrastructure.
  Section 208(d) would direct the Administrator to submit 
regional adaptation plans to Congress 3 years after the 
implementation of the pilot programs. These plans should be 
based on the regional assessments discussed in section 208(b) 
and be developed with the participation of agencies at all 
levels of government as well as various non-governmental 
entities that have a stake in the pilot projects. The 
assessments should include recommendations for: (1) targets and 
strategies for addressing the hazards discussed above; (2) 
short and long term adaptation strategies; (3) Federal flood 
insurance programs; (4) areas that have been identified as high 
risk; (5) enhancing the effectiveness of State coastal zone 
management programs in mitigating the hazards discussed above; 
(6) mitigation incentives; (7) land and property owner 
education; (8) economic plans for small at risk communities; 
and (9) funding requirements and mechanisms.
  Section 208(e) would direct the Administrator to establish a 
coordinated program to provide technical planning and 
assistance to coastal States, tribes and local governments as 
they implement strategies developed under this section. This 
program would also make available to these same entities all 
products, information, tools, and technical expertise generated 
through the regional assessments and adaptation plans.

Section 209. Authorization of appropriations.

  Section 209 would authorize $35 million to the Administrator 
of NOAA for each of fiscal years (FY) 2006 through 2012 to 
carry out the purposes of this act. An additional $5 million 
would be provided to NOAA for FY 2006-2012 for activities 
carried out under section 8, of which at least $3 million is to 
be used for the pilot programs annually.

                        Changes in Existing Law

  In compliance with paragraph 12 of rule XXVI of the Standing 
Rules of the Senate, changes in existing law made by the bill, 
as reported, are shown as follows (existing law proposed to be 
omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new material is printed 
in italic, existing law in which no change is proposed is shown 
in roman):

                     HOMELAND SECURITY ACT OF 2002

SEC. 502. RESPONSIBILITIES.

                             [6 U.S.C. 312]

  The Secretary, acting through the Under Secretary for 
Emergency Preparedness and Response, shall include--
          (1) helping to ensure the effectiveness of emergency 
        response providers to terrorist attacks, major 
        disasters, and other emergencies;
          (2) with respect to the Nuclear Incident Response 
        Team (regardless of whether it is operating as an 
        organizational unit of the Department pursuant to this 
        title (6 U.S.C. 311 et seq.))--
                  (A) establishing standards and certifying 
                when those standards have been met;
                  (B) conducting joint and other exercises and 
                training and evaluating performance; and
                  (C) providing funds to the Department of 
                Energy and the Environmental Protection Agency, 
                as appropriate, for homeland security planning, 
                exercises and training, and equipment;
          (3) providing the Federal Government's response to 
        terrorist attacks and major disasters, including--
                  (A) managing such response;
                  (B) directing the Domestic Emergency Support 
                Team, the National Disaster Medical System, and 
                (when operating as an organizational unit of 
                the Department pursuant to this title (6 U.S.C. 
                311 et seq.)) the Nuclear Incident Response 
                Team;
                  (C) overseeing the Metropolitan Medical 
                Response System; and
                  (D) coordinating other Federal response 
                resources, including requiring deployment of 
                the Strategic National Stockpile, in the event 
                of a terrorist attack or major disaster;
          (4) aiding the recovery from terrorist attacks and 
        major disasters;
          (5) building a comprehensive national incident 
        management system with Federal, State, and local 
        government personnel, agencies, and authorities, in 
        consultation with providers of telecommunications 
        services (as defined in section 3(46) of the 
        Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 153(46))) owning 
        or operating communications infrastructure, to respond 
        to such attacks and disasters;
          (6) consolidating existing Federal Government 
        emergency response plans into a single, coordinated 
        national response plan; [and]
          (7) helping to ensure that emergency response 
        providers acquire interoperable communications 
        [technology.] technology; and
          (8) developing comprehensive mechanisms to work with 
        and support critical infrastructure providers, 
        including but not limited to providers of 
        telecommunications services (as defined in section 
        3(46) of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 
        153(46))), to ensure sufficient communications during a 
        crisis or major disaster response.

    ROBERT T. STAFFORD DISASTER RELIEF AND EMERGENCY ASSISTANCE ACT

                         SEC. 102. DEFINITIONS.

                            [42 U.S.C. 5122]

  As used in this Act--
          (1) Emergency.--``Emergency'' means any occasion or 
        instance for which, in the determination of the 
        President, Federal assistance is needed to supplement 
        State and local efforts and capabilities to save lives 
        and to protect property and public health and safety, 
        or to lessen or avert the threat of a catastrophe in 
        any part of the United States.
          (2) Major disaster.--``Major disaster'' means any 
        natural catastrophe (including any hurricane, tornado, 
        storm, high water, winddriven water, tidal wave, 
        tsunami, earthquake, volcanic eruption, landslide, 
        mudslide, snowstorm, or drought), or, regardless of 
        cause, any fire, flood, or explosion, in any part of 
        the United States, which in the determination of the 
        President causes damage of sufficient severity and 
        magnitude to warrant major disaster assistance under 
        this Act to supplement the efforts and available 
        resources of States, local governments, and disaster 
        relief organizations in alleviating the damage, loss, 
        hardship, or suffering caused thereby.
          (3) United States.--``United States'' means the fifty 
        States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the 
        Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, and the 
        Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands.
          (4) State.--``State'' means any State of the United 
        States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the 
        Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, and the 
        Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands.
          (5) Governor.--``Governor'' means the chief executive 
        of any State.
          (6) Local government.--The term ``local government'' 
        means--
                  (A) a county, municipality, city, town, 
                township, local public authority, school 
                district, special district, intrastate 
                district, council of governments (regardless of 
                whether the council of governments is 
                incorporated as a nonprofit corporation under 
                State law), regional or interstate government 
                entity, or agency or instrumentality of a local 
                government;
                  (B) an Indian tribe or authorized tribal 
                organization, or Alaska Native village or 
                organization; and
                  (C) a rural community, unincorporated town or 
                village, or other public entity, for which an 
                application for assistance is made by a State 
                or political subdivision of a State.
          (7) Federal agency.--``Federal agency'' means any 
        department, independent establishment, Government 
        corporation, or other agency of the executive branch of 
        the Federal Government, including the United States 
        Postal Service, but shall not include the American 
        National Red Cross.
          (8) Public facility.--``Public facility'' means the 
        following facilities owned by a State or local 
        government:
                  (A) Any flood control, navigation, 
                irrigation, reclamation, public power, sewage 
                treatment and collection, water supply and 
                distribution, watershed development, or airport 
                facility.
                  (B) Any non-Federal-aid street, road, or 
                highway.
                  (C) Any other public building, structure, or 
                system, including those used for educational, 
                recreational, or cultural purposes.
                  (D) Any park.
          (9) Private nonprofit facility.--``Private nonprofit 
        facility'' means private nonprofit educational, 
        utility, irrigation, emergency, medical, 
        rehabilitational, and temporary or permanent custodial 
        care facilities (including those for the aged and 
        disabled), other private nonprofit facilities which 
        provide essential services of a governmental nature to 
        the general public, and facilities on Indian 
        reservations as defined by the President.
          (10) Telecommunications service provider.--The term 
        ``telecommunications service provider'' means a 
        provider of telecommunications service as that term is 
        defined in section 3(46) of the Communications Act of 
        1934 (47 U.S.C. 153(46)).

SEC. 403. ESSENTIAL ASSISTANCE.

                           [42 U.S.C. 5170b]

  (a) In General.--Federal agencies may on the direction of the 
President, provide assistance essential to meeting immediate 
threats to life and property resulting from a major disaster, 
as follows:
          [(1) Federal resources, generally.--Utilizing, 
        lending, or donating to State and local governments 
        Federal equipment, supplies, facilities, personnel, and 
        other resources, other than the extension of credit, 
        for use or distribution by such governments in 
        accordance with the purposes of this Act.]
          (1) Federal resources.--Utilizing, lending, or 
        donating Federal equipment, supplies, facilities, 
        personnel, and other resources (other than the 
        extension of credit)--
                  (A) to State and local governments for use or 
                distribution by such governments in accordance 
                with the purposes of this Act; or
                  (B) to assist telecommunications service 
                providers in the maintenance and restoration of 
                communications during an emergency or major 
                disaster.
          (2) Medicine, food, and other consumables.--
        Distributing or rendering through State and local 
        governments, the American National Red Cross, the 
        Salvation Army, the Mennonite Disaster Service, and 
        other relief and disaster assistance organizations 
        medicine, food, and other consumable supplies, and 
        other services and assistance to disaster victims.
          (3) Work and services to save lives and protect 
        property.--Performing on public or private lands or 
        waters any work or services essential to saving lives 
        and protecting and preserving property or public health 
        and safety, including--
                  (A) debris removal;
                  (B) search and rescue, emergency medical 
                care, emergency mass care, emergency shelter, 
                and provision of food, water, medicine, and 
                other essential needs, including movement of 
                supplies or persons;
                  (C) clearance of roads and construction of 
                temporary bridges necessary to the performance 
                of emergency tasks and essential community 
                services;
                  (D) provision of temporary facilities for 
                schools and other essential community services;
                  (E) demolition of unsafe structures which 
                endanger the public;
                  (F) warning of further risks and hazards;
                  (G) dissemination of public information and 
                assistance regarding health and safety 
                measures;
                  (H) provision of technical advice to State 
                and local governments on disaster management 
                and control; and
                  (I) reduction of immediate threats to life, 
                property, and public health and safety.
          (4) Contributions.--Making contributions to State or 
        local governments or owners or operators of private 
        nonprofit facilities for the purpose of carrying out 
        the provisions of this subsection.
  (b) Federal Share.--Federal share of assistance under this 
section shall be not less than 75 percent of the eligible cost 
of such assistance.
  (c) Utilization of DOD Resources.--
          (1) General rule.--During the immediate aftermath of 
        an incident which may ultimately qualify for assistance 
        under this title or title V of this Act (42 U.S.C. 5170 
        et seq. or 5191 et seq.), the Governor of the State in 
        which such incident occurred may request the President 
        to direct the Secretary of Defense to utilize the 
        resources of the Department of Defense for the purpose 
        of performing on public and private lands any emergency 
        work which is made necessary by such incident and which 
        is essential for the preservation of life and property. 
        If the President determines that such work is essential 
        for the preservation of life and property, the 
        President shall grant such request to the extent the 
        President determines practicable. Such emergency work 
        may only be carried out for a period not to exceed 10 
        days.
          (2) Rules applicable to debris removal.--Any removal 
        of debris and wreckage carried out under this 
        subsection shall be subject to section 407(b) (42 
        U.S.C. 5172(b)), relating to unconditional 
        authorization and indemnification for debris removal.
          (3) Expenditures out of disaster relief funds.--The 
        cost of any assistance provided pursuant to this 
        subsection shall be reimbursed out of funds made 
        available to carry out this Act.
          (4) Federal share.--The Federal share of assistance 
        under this subsection shall be not less than 75 
        percent.
          (5) Guidelines.--Not later than 180 days after the 
        date of the enactment of the Disaster Relief and 
        Emergency Assistance Amendments of 1988 (enacted Nov. 
        23, 1988), the President shall issue guidelines for 
        carrying out this subsection. Such guidelines shall 
        consider any likely effect assistance under this 
        subsection would have on the availability of other 
        forms of assistance under this Act.
          (6) Definitions.--For purposes of this section--
                  (A) Department of Defense.--The term 
                ``Department of Defense'' has the meaning the 
                term ``department'' has under section 101 of 
                title 10, United States Code.
                  (B) Emergency work.--The term ``emergency 
                work'' includes clearance and removal of debris 
                and wreckage and temporary restoration of 
                essential public facilities and services.

                                  
